List Output Folders

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, but the description mentions it is a GET endpoint, which lightly indicates a read-only operation. It doesn't describe output details or error behavior, but with no params and a simple list, this is acceptable.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, concise sentence that includes the endpoint path. It is front-loaded with the main purpose and has zero wasted words.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given it's a simple zero-parameter list tool with no output schema, the description is sufficient for basic use. It doesn't explain what the labels look like or the exact return shape, but for a simple listing operation, that's not critical.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has no parameters, and the schema coverage is 100% with zero properties. The description adds clarity on what the output contains (folders with labels), which is useful beyond the empty schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states 'List output/gallery folders with labels' — a specific verb (list) and resource (output/gallery folders) with scope. It distinguishes from sibling tools like sdnext_browser_files or sdnext_storage, which handle files or storage stats.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It implies use for retrieving folder listings but doesn't explicitly state when to use vs alternatives (e.g., browser_files for files). Since there is no sibling tool for folders, the context is somewhat clear, but no explicit when/when-not is provided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.